Returning Heros Home Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
711025698
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
San Antonio, TX, USA
Phone
2109792500
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Citizen Participation

Reported finances

Revenue
$20,819
Expenses
$329,554
Assets
$290,958
Liabilities
$290,958

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEVEN HUFFMAN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • STEPHEN FOGLE (CHAIRMAN)
  • STEVEN HUFFMAN (PRESIDENT)
  • ART DOWNEY (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To serve and support wounded, ill and injured warriors and their family members at the warrior and family support center(wfsc). Warriors who visit the wfsc are there while receiving medical treatment at sammc for severe injuries and illnesses. These warriors come from all over the united states and often stay for extended periods of time.

What it reported doing in 2020

Every year, the wfsc staff, dozens of volunteers and returning heroes home, inc (rhh), through the help of our donors work in collaboration to support hundreds of wounded, ill, and injured warriors overcoming some of the biggest difficulties of their lives. Through our public-private collaboration, wfsc and rhh offer programs, events, and activities designed to promote health and reduce stress and anqiety in an optimum environment for healing and rehabilitation. Evidence-based design takes into account how elements such as building layout, windows, light, access to nature, color, sound furniture arrangements, and air quality contribute to positive outcomes, both physical and emotional, for our warriors in recovery as well as their family members. This philosophy continues to guide the supporting programs, events, and activities that enhance the quality of life for the warriors and their family members served through wfsc. Today rhh and the u.s. Military have a public-private collaborative designed to enhance the quality of life for our nation's warriors who have been wounded, injured or became ill while on active duty. Rhh continues to contribute to the wfsc's programs, events, and activities that are designed to enhance the healing experience and promote family and social interaction while offering a sense of home to warriors and their family members.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 99% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 87.3%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.26 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1,482.9%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.88; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.5% per year; rating input score 0; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -19.1% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -17.7% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $288K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.